MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Analyzing the effects of species gain and loss on ecosystem function using the extended Price equation partition

2011· article· en· W2122660125 on OpenAlexafffund
Jeremy W. Fox, Benjamin Kerr

Bibliographic record

VenueOikos · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEcosystemSpecies richnessBiodiversityBiomass (ecology)Function (biology)EcologyPartition (number theory)Price equationBiologyMathematicsEvolutionary biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In nature species richness and composition, as well as the functioning of individual species, all covary along environmental gradients, making it difficult to tease apart their effects on ecosystem function. Here we use a novel extension of the Price equation to partition the causes of functional variation between any two sites sharing at least one species in common. We use the extension to separate effects of species loss from those of species gain; species gain is analogous to migration in evolution. Previous theoretical and empirical studies of biodiversity and ecosystem function fail to distinguish effects of species gain from those of species loss, and so are conceptually incomplete. Application of this approach to data on total plant biomass along an experimental N enrichment gradient leads to novel empirical insights and reveals subtle effects. For instance, effects of species gain are non‐negligible even though enrichment leads to loss of many species and gain of few, and non‐random gain of high‐biomass species reduces the biomass of the persisting species. We also discuss the interpretation of this new approach, which provides a highly‐general partitioning of the factors affecting ecosystem function.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.116
Threshold uncertainty score0.181

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations71
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOikosSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207